Jun 13 2007
Michelle Proves My Point
Michelle Malkin has made my point about the idiocy of saying all we need to do is enforce our laws and we are good. She has a long list of cases where the laws fell down and failed. Not because law enforcement was not trying (duh – that is why these cases were in court) but because the laws on the books are impotent and full of holes. Malkin likes to claim those we see this and realize the immigration bill will close a lot of those holes so when these cases go to court the government wins more are either (1) Liars or (b) Clueless.
Whatever Michelle. The fact is she provides a strong case why the status quo is a failure not because of a lack of effort or money or fences. It is a failure because it is FUBAR’d. While imperfect, the immigration bill fixes a lot of these holes. It includes “amnesty” as well for the long term illegals here now. But instead of fixing these holes and stopping this madness and taking the criminals off the streets and showing them the door at our border, Malkin continues to kid herself that we should not pass the bill.
This illogical position is rapidly becoming untenable and will fail. Just as it fails the laugh test. Our laws are broken so heaven forbid we do something to fix them! It is Malkin, Tancredo and Lou Dobbs who are fighting to keep this mess. Two thirds are ready to work the problem and get beyond this pretzel logic infecting the far right of the GOP.
BTW, the rift on the right is real and some are waking up. DJ Drummond addresses the issue well. I feel I was in the camp that tried to warn those who were going too far that they should slow down. I tried it respectfully. I have now joined a new camp – I am do not want to bury the hatchet. Too many trips down the purity road. Too many times hard core emotions torpedoed the conservative coalition, taking aim out fellow cons. Too many willing to go the scortched earth path to win. I was once in the let’s try to work this out camp. Now I am in the ‘why would I want to ally with these people’ camp. I am not being vindictive. I have been utterly repulsed. To much vitriol, too much hate, to much of a lot of bad things I don’t need to name anymore. That is why I say the coalition is over. I tend to be one of the last rats to jump a sinking ship. I am an optimist at heart.
But there comes a point to close the chapter and move on. Without some kind of mea culpa from the flame throwers on the right and a commitment to not repeat what has been repeated many times now since Harriet Miers had her name dragged through the mud – that chapter seems better closed. Everytime I peak at the comments at Free Republic and Lucianne and LGF I see reasons to shut the door again – not walk back in. At some point you stop seeing the good and you see all the bad and it becomes too much, it overpowers the good.
MerlinOS2,
You are normally at the top of your game but Miers is in the past. Why do conservatives feel the need to keep bringing up the past? Anyways, Roberts was appointed BEFORE Miers. It was Alito that followed her.
None of us knows what her decisions on certain issues would be, like on abortion. GW had a closer knowledge than any of us and I tend to think she may have surprised us.
If you want to focus on the past with SCOTUS appointments, how about Sandra O’Connor? In my opinion she was a disaster and her post bench comments in the press seem to uphold that belief with me. Like former POTUS should refrain from speaking out against a sitting one, so should former SCOTUS appointees. I guess like Carter, Clinton, O’Connor missed that.
AJ
Another point in Michelles article,or another I researched later, is that to become an immigration Judge, you need five years background as an immigration lawyer.
So you have to be a person who is trying to take the position to keep the illegals from being deported to become a person who determines if they are deported.
Sort of like the fox watching the hen house don’t you think?
Roonent1
Thanks for the praise, but it was only brought up and bloomed as a side issue that AJ addressed in his post.
After that it took on a life on it’s own.
Back to this lousy deceptive “Immigration Reform Bill.” If they would take the amnesty part out, (and it is amnesty. When you agree not to prosecute people for crimes it is amnesy. And entering our borders illegally, and overstaying you visa is a crime. ) the rest would probably be acceptable to the majority of us. We do not approve of, nor will we accept, rewarding people from other countries who have broken the law. when we aren’t allowed to break the law and get away with it. Just look at that poor Border Patrol guy who entered the wrong info on a form. When he realized the info was wrong he tried to amend the form and enter the right info. After he brought it to their attention, they decided to prosecute him for entering false info on a Govt. form. Now he is headed for jail.
We will send one of our own citizens to jail for making a mistake but we are supposed to accept amnesty and rewards for between 12 and 20 million foreigners who have broken far more serious laws than making a mistake when filling out a form.
Merlin:
My point is that I don’t know enough about the issue to make a judgment and unlike some people I am not afraid to say that.
And there was a process involved that was cut short because of the hissy fit and so Miers never even had a real chance to make a case for herself before a bunch of people sideswiped her.
Roberts and Alito seem to be up to the job and the same man nominated them.
I think there are a lot of people out here who are second guessing the judgment of people like Bush when they know just about as much about the Supreme Court justices, port terminals and immigration as Al Gore knows about global warming and climate science.
BTW, wasn’t Fred Thompson one of the people who helped Bush pick nominees?
You are doing it again. You are ignoring the bile. This is why it get’s ugly. You tolerate way too much.
Left by AJStrata on June 13th, 2007
No AJ, I realize the bile is there and will always be unless everyone joins hands and we become one party, one religion or non religion , or some generic melted down blob of nothingness.
That is why I call myself pragmatic. I may not in fact be due to my own biases on some issues and even dismissed of that by some. But each chance I have, that is the goal I try to reach.
momdear1,
only 23% want the ‘amnesty’ out. That is not a majority. It is a harmless minority. As I said – the truth is as you say it. It is the ‘amnesy’ the far right cannot swallow. All the rest is self delusional cover stories.
Since when has anybody argued against tougher laws and/or enforcement? AJ you’ve misread this thing the whole way through…and that’s not anybodies fault but your own. The problem with the previous bill (they are currently amending it as we speak trying to get it back on track and shore up some kind of public support for it) was that it was percieved by the public at large to be mainly focused on legalizing illegal aliens and keeping them working more than it was focused on “stopping” illegal immigration, securing our borders, etc. And most people viewed it as more of an alien rights bill than any kind of legal or otherwise “reform” bill. (even though it obviously has elements of both in it)
The point was…it got started on the wrong foot…and when they realized there was some resistance to the way it was being presented…they tried to call everybody bigots..etc..then tried to ram it down peoples throats. ANNNNNnnkkk. Wrong. Sorry.
The majority mainstream views on this…cuts across every demographic there is. We can’t help the fact that some people totally miscalculated and misread what was out there. It’s the general consensus of most Americans…that they don’t believe the previous version of the bill as it was presented would actually reduce illegal immigration (only 17% believed it actually would be effective in reducing illegal immigration and lead to the enforcment of our borders). People, for whatever reasons, didn’t buy the arguments that this bill already addressed their concerns. So, the Senators, having realized they are loosing the support of the American public in this…are now scrambling to make changes to this bill trying to find something that would garner wider support. So, all the chicken little…”if we don’t pass this bill…we are stuck with status-quo” was for naught. We “will” get a bill.
All of the information suggests that this bill will pass..when most Americans feel that their concerns are being listened to and they have more confidence that the bills provisions will reduce illegal immigration and secure our borders. The current measures they are taking (ie..putting more language and provisions in the bill to reflect that ….and taking care of some of the obvious loop-holes)….is to try and build confidence with “us”. And it is an obvious backtrack from their previous position of name calling and suggesting these issues are not important or were already somehow addressed in the bill.
Anyway..it will all take it’s course in due time. I don’t think you need to fret much about it.
Terrye
I may not know all the specifics of judicial choices, but I know by my view I prefer strict constructionist on the highest court in our land.
I know some judges have backgrounds in case law and jurisprudence that can be evaluated for that concept.
I rely on those competent enough to give informed opinion on an area that they have much more expertise than I do.
They have done the research and the homework to make their recommendations.
Now if I blindly accept them, then that’s on me.
But if I cross check them and look at a few of the legal opinions the recommended judges have weighed in on and it fits my comfort zone that they are giving me good data, then yes I can support their recommendations.
By the way I have complied some pictures and drawings from past immigration debates. It is depressing that much of this is the same
http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/messagetopic.asp?p=4790637
what’s so ironic is the fact that Harriet Miers no doubt played a huge part in the choosing of Roberts and Alito as USSC nominees
Merlin:
I am not talking about views, everyone has views, I am talking about a certain minority pitching a fit until they get what they want as if their views are the only ones that matter.
I am not saying that is you.
But the reaction to the Miers nomination was ridiculous and it hurt Republicans.
No Dc the problem is that there is a minority that refuses to compromise. I hope they can come up with a Senate bill these people will accept, but I am beginning to wonder if there is such a thing.
Right now Lou Dobbs is not telling Bush to give it a rest, and that does not sound like someone who is looking for a solution. And there are a lot of folks on the right like that.
Lou Dobbs is dangerous to the party. I know he is not a Republican but goodness people hang on his word. His views of trade and the markets at time scare the heck out of me
Great posts today, AJ, Terrye and Sally Vee! Many in the conservative movement (rinos!) have jumped the shark.
I can tell you this: I want to be like George W. Bush, not like a single talking head or radio talk show host. Not one.
Terrye
I think in the Meirs issue, the supposed amount of difference was amplified many times by the MSM megaphone that smelled blood on the water.
Quite frankly I believe the same thing is happening here right now on this issue.
You have those that support the bill, those that want to make it better if it is going to be the law of the land and rejectionists.
I think there are a small few but loud extremes and the MSM and many others are buying into or trying to sell the wedge issue of all this.
Also with good cause there are many who fit into the twice bit and thus untrusting gunshy based on past performance.
Sally Vee
In the end I wonder how many of thebig Conservative bloggers are being paid consulting fees to take the stances they do. That thought has crossed my minds
Merlin:
That may very well be true. I don’t doubt the media will take advantage of the situation.
I think the thing that has annoyed me the most is that we are in a war, our soldiers are out there risking their lives and there are people on the left who would like nothing better than to lose that war.
I expect the right to temper their statements and be careful about weakening a war time president. At least the Democrats have the excuse that they don’t really think there is a war to lose, but conservatives know better.
And they still pulled this stunt.
Biglsufan:
I have wondered the same thing. I have also wondered why they decided to have such a fit about it now.
I understand what Merlin says about being gunshy, but it has been obvious for years that our laws were not adequate to the situation and somehow these people managed to ignore it without an abundance of moral outrage.
I still think we are all to blame for this, just blaming the government is an easy to avoid responsibility. If the American people had really been interested in obeying these laws themselves, things would be different today.
Just to show how strange polls can be on this issue, this poll shows that 78% show support for legalization.
the polls that count are elections and in the last election it was the hardliners who lost. I think people are confused about the issue and while they react with skepticism when certain people out to kill a bill tell them that there are enforcement measures in the bill and it is all about shamnesty, they still want a solution.